New EU Law Could Force Apple To Allow Other App Stores, Sideloading, and iMessage Interoperability (macrumors.com) 209
New EU rules came into force today that could compel Apple to let users access third-party app stores and permit app sideloading on iPhones and iPads, among other sweeping changes designed to make the digital sector fairer and more competitive. MacRumors reports: Under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the rules will apply to tech giants that meet its "gatekeeper" criteria and force them to open up their various services and platforms to other companies and developers. Apple is almost certain to be classified as a "gatekeeper" due to the size of its annual turnover in the EU, its ownership and operation of platforms with a large number of active users, and its "entrenched and durable position" due to how long it has met these criteria, and will therefore be subject to the rules set out in the DMA.
The DMA could force Apple to make major changes to the way the App Store, Messages, FaceTime, and Siri work in Europe. For example, it could be forced to allow users to install third-party app stores and sideload apps, give developers the ability to closely interoperate with Apple's own services and promote their offers outside the App Store and use third-party payment systems, and access data gathered by Apple. One of the more recent additions to the DMA is the requirement to make messaging, voice-calling, and video-calling services interoperable. The interoperability rules theoretically mean that Meta apps like WhatsApp or Messenger could request to interoperate with Apple's iMessage framework, and Apple would be forced to comply within the EU.
The DMA was proposed by the European Commission in December 2020 and agreed by the European Parliament and the Council in record-time, in March 2022. It now moves into a six-month implementation phase and will start to apply on May 2, 2023. After that, within two months and at the latest by July 3, 2023, potential gatekeepers will have to inform the Commission of their core platform services if they meet the thresholds established by the DMA. Once the Commission has received the complete information, it will have 45 working days to make an assessment as to whether the company in question meets the thresholds and to designate them as gatekeepers. Following their designation, gatekeepers will have six months to comply with the requirements in the DMA, at the latest by March 6, 2024.
The DMA could force Apple to make major changes to the way the App Store, Messages, FaceTime, and Siri work in Europe. For example, it could be forced to allow users to install third-party app stores and sideload apps, give developers the ability to closely interoperate with Apple's own services and promote their offers outside the App Store and use third-party payment systems, and access data gathered by Apple. One of the more recent additions to the DMA is the requirement to make messaging, voice-calling, and video-calling services interoperable. The interoperability rules theoretically mean that Meta apps like WhatsApp or Messenger could request to interoperate with Apple's iMessage framework, and Apple would be forced to comply within the EU.
The DMA was proposed by the European Commission in December 2020 and agreed by the European Parliament and the Council in record-time, in March 2022. It now moves into a six-month implementation phase and will start to apply on May 2, 2023. After that, within two months and at the latest by July 3, 2023, potential gatekeepers will have to inform the Commission of their core platform services if they meet the thresholds established by the DMA. Once the Commission has received the complete information, it will have 45 working days to make an assessment as to whether the company in question meets the thresholds and to designate them as gatekeepers. Following their designation, gatekeepers will have six months to comply with the requirements in the DMA, at the latest by March 6, 2024.
Government Nose (Score:2, Insightful)
Needs punching. I hate Apple as much as the next guy, but having the government making company decisions because of 'whatever' is clearly a sign of over reach. If folks wanna belong to a tech cult so be it, but if things don't work correctly with other tech, then that is just the price you pay.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's more about the government helping lobbyists and cronies at the expense of a private company; helping end users is just the excuse.
So who are the lobbyists and cronies influencing this decision in the EU? What do they have to gain? And if they get it, but users also get the right to load what they want on their own computers, will it be worth it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Completely wrong. This is anti-trust and it is an exceptionally important government responsibility to keep Kapitalism working.
The other shoe is coming (Score:2, Interesting)
The one where the EU requires Apple give them real-time access to all iMessages.
Re: (Score:2)
How does that require sideloading or opening the protocol? They just say "gimme" and Apple rolls over because they don't want to get into trouble with that market.
C'mon, are you new to this planet?
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to Apple's refusal to follow fucking STANDARDS I lost a couple of contracts because my clients couldn't see any real detail in the images I was providing to them from a remote field location. "That material doesn't look THAT good" Gee, fucking THANKS, Apple.
Nice made up story.
Apple follows all standards.
Many standards are either invented by them or build with their support.
Those assholes need to be forced to play nice with the rest of the fucking world. Tim Cook needs my foot shoved so far up his as
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this! We need the government to protect us from the duopoly we have now and make both phones operate the same!
If by "the same" you mean "without artificial restrictions intended to milk money out of fools" then yes. Society benefits from educating fools, not allowing them to be defrauded.
Choice is bad! Consumer option is bad!
Right, that's why you bought an iPhone, because you believe those things. You knew you couldn't be trusted with choice.
I love you super pro-Big Corp anti-consumer shills.
That's a very stupid thing to say, even for you. You're rooting for the corporation fucking people over. I'm rooting for them not being permitted to do that. Put down the cock of the ghost of Steve Jobs before typi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with protocols.
It is "platforms".
E.g. WhatsApp and Signal use the same protocol.
ll communication software should be able to interoperate with each other in the same way phones of different makes can call each other. comms protocols should not lock out development of similar software.
Simply: NOPE!
I do not want my Skype contacts to see me online on Telegram. Why the funk would anyone mix up all chat apps with each other? There thousands of reasons why they are solitair communication plat
Hey Europe, Leave my Tech Alone! (Score:5, Informative)
What happened to consumer choice? There is a phone OS that provides all of this things — Android. Who wants this? Competitors, hackers, advertisers, and developers who don't want to pay for access to the platform Apple has created. I don't hear demands for this from the average Apple user, and when people ask me what device they should buy, I explain the differences between open and a walled garden, and explain why I chose the walled garden.
The problem with allowing sideloading is that if it can be done legitimately, it can be done illegitimately. If sandboxing can be ignored, and not enforced by the OS, then nothing prevents a malicious app/add/message from compromising your device. Making sideloading possible decreases security. Having to allow apps that don't follow the sandboxing rules put the entire phone at risk.
If Android didn't exist, there might be an argument. It does, so those who don't like Apple can use it. That's choice.
Re: (Score:2)
What happened to consumer choice?
What choice? It's not as if you can own any phone equipment. Even on Android when you load your version the bootloader limits your actions and security. There is no choice.
It's not as if you can pickup a phone and control all the settings.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course you can. Custom roms exist, and so does completely free and open hardware.
It's just inconvenient and most people are cattle so they don't bother.
Re: (Score:2)
"Custom roms exist"
Ah yes the infamous Apple iPhone custom roms.
Can the slashdot libertarians at least *try* to not come up with imaginary reasons why giving consumers the choice to sideload is somehow anti consumer choice.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a libertarian you numnut. Your mentioning 'iphone custom roms' shows you didn't even read the fucking comment you are replying to.
The comment I replied to said even Android doesn't give you a choice, and I pointed out there are Android solutions that do.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not as if you can pickup a phone and control all the settings.
Depends on the phone, there are quite a few were you even can exchange the boot loader.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Kind of funny how all the people defending their walled garden are likely the aged versions of the same people condemning Microsoft 20 years ago for doing something similar but to a far lesser extent.
Re: (Score:2)
What happened to consumer choice?
Apple shit on it by locking down a general purpose computer to only permit it to install software from one source.
I don't hear demands for this from the average Apple user
And only majorities matter!
This is what passes for logic in candy-coated, I'm-special-because-I-own-an-iDevice-just-like-everyone-else Apple land.
The problem with allowing sideloading is that if it can be done legitimately, it can be done illegitimately.
Really? Can you show an instance where the sideloading functionality on Android was utilized without the user's consent?
Re: (Score:2)
I find it strange that everyone bleats about "being free" and having the freedom to do what they like yet defend being locked into a phone
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You are right. Every product should be locked down like an Apple phone. The tires on your car. The ice cubes in your refrigerator. The meat that you can cook on your stove. The clothes that you wear in your house. It should all be limited and controlled by the company that sold you the product. Why should you even have a choice how to use the product? It's not as if you own it, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who wants a locked down device is a dumb sheep
In short, yes. Apple has distributed malware to users from their store before, so the safety of the walled garden is illusory. It is in fact a deliberate fraud. If you believe Apple cares about keeping you safe when the EULA explicitly says they don't take responsibility then you've been suckered. And now due to cognitive dissonance, you're angrily claiming that everyone else is being a fool while you defend a multi billion dollar public corporation that is constitutionally incapable of caring about you...
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has distributed malware to users from their store before, so the safety of the walled garden is illusory.
"People have died in car crashes even when wearing a seatbelt, so the safety provided by a seatbelt is illusory."
Re: (Score:2)
"People have died in car crashes even when wearing a seatbelt, so the safety provided by a seatbelt is illusory."
That's correct to a degree, in that the idea that a seatbelt will prevent you from being harmed is foolish; it only decreases the risk of harm, and the seriousness of it. The difference between the two situations however is that Apple has actively assisted in the delivery of the malware, whereas when the seatbelt fails to save your life, or injures you, it's because something bad happened from an external source. When Apple delivers malware to your phone, it's like your seatbelt choked you and caused an acc
Re: (Score:2)
Seatbelts sometimes trap individuals in burning or sinking cars. Some... opinionated individuals have helpfully curated a list of "victims." [againstsea...ulsion.org]
The question is really "do seatbelts have a net positive or negative impact on passenger safety?" and in a similar vein "does the Apple walled garden have a net positive or negative impact on its customers risk of malware infection?"
I don't think we have the exact data we'd need to answer this question (for smartphones - I like to think the seatbelt debate is prett
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the argument would be "If Microsoft locks down Windows in the same way as macOS/iOS, you are welcome to switch to a Linux PC, and it will even be cheaper!"
Standards vs competition (Score:5, Insightful)
How much does it matter for phones? Time will tell. For now I'm glad that even if they use different messaging systems at least they do have to transmit on standard frequencies. Given the opportunity you know they would not.
Re: (Score:2)
It is always going to be a juggling act. I'm glad the tires on my car are not specific to just my car. That the power in my house is the same voltage as my neighbor. That goods I buy are all labelled in at least one consistent scale.
I for one am glad that those things are decided at the whim of a democratically elected government rather than one oversized private corporation who dictate with incredibly strict terms how other corporations run.
How much does it matter for phones?
I think many people here look forward to the day when not all browsers on iOS are Safari with makeup on.
Been waiting for this since some time (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed they have. And, unlike the US, capitalism is not broken in the EU and anti-trust bodies are fulfilling their responsibilities.
The ones claiming this is in some way "bad" must the the most abysmally stupid morons available.
Re: (Score:2)
The same style law applied equally to everyone
You're asking for buyers to be treated like sellers when they're not buying, and sellers to be treated like owners when they have sold something to a buyer. In short, you're defending Apple literally attempting to break commerce.
Good. This is the best form of capitalism. (Score:5, Insightful)
The best form of capitalism is one that is well regulated, to allow mostly free markets without explicitly leeching and abusing consumers.
That aside, if I buy a device, any device that can run software, it should NEVER be up to the owner what software I run on my device. End of fucking story. I know Apple has its apologists, but they can be dismissed as they are in a reality distortion field and are not even aware of it, poor things.
Apple will cry and make a big deal about this, claiming it's for security but we know that is bullshit. Hell, make people jump through hoops to enable sideloading or other app stores, but at least OFFER it as an option.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on what you think a smartphone is. People who view them as appliances/tools will say that your argument is invalid, since you also can't run whatever software you want on your game console, your media player set-top box, your TV, your smart washer and dryer, your smart fridge, etc.
People who view smartphones as portable computers will have a completely different view point.
Re: (Score:2)
It's less a case of your ability to run software, and more a case of what your software provider wants to offer you on a platform and what is dictated to them.
E.g. Firefox on Android = Firefox
Firefox on iOS = Safari with makeup on, as dictated by Apple.
Users may want to run Firefox, but they are not getting Firefox. They are getting a lie forced on them by a closed ecosystem. And while I think infinitely more highly of Apple then I do of Epic, I do support the idea that Epic should get to choose how to bill
Re: (Score:2)
Users may want to run Firefox, but they are not getting Firefox.
They get Firefox. Only that FF is linked to the Apple JS engine and the Apple rendering engine isntead of "what ever".
They are getting a lie forced on them by a closed ecosystem.
It is no lie. Everyone knows that FF on iOS is linked ot Apple libs. And no one cares. What we care is Look&Feel. Does it look like FF? Does it work like FF? Does it feel like FF?
If so: it is good.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on what you think a smartphone is. People who view them as appliances/tools will say that your argument is invalid, since you also can't run whatever software you want on your game console, your media player set-top box, your TV, your smart washer and dryer, your smart fridge, etc.
People who view smartphones as portable computers will have a completely different view point.
So either give an option of a one time process to "unlock" the device, after which it's forever considered a mobile "computer" which can run anything (maybe disables some security features in return) or sell a version of the phone which is set to be a "computer" and not an appliance.
Let the user decide.
Re: (Score:2)
... it should NEVER be up to the owner what software I run on my device.
So you admit that Apple is the 'owner' of your iPhone? Or... is that merely a stream of thought mistake in wording? Or did I completely miss what you were trying to say?
Re: (Score:2)
And that is exactly it. Also, this is not about forcing people to use other app-stores. It is about _allowing_ them to do it. And it was overdue.
Unrealistic Scheduling (Score:3)
> Following their designation, gatekeepers will have six months to comply with the requirements in the DMA, at the latest by March 6, 2024.
Six months? Really? To engage in major software changes to some government whims? From start to finish with some sort of certified compliance and without accidentally violating some other regulations/accounting/business contracts in the process?
Re: (Score:2)
Six months? Really? To engage in major software changes
These are not major software changes. All they have to do is shut off a single misfeature, which I promise you they already have a way to do for internal use.
to some government whims?
To you, things done by government to keep the economy functioning and protect the interests of citizens and customers alike are whims. Apple is sitting on unprecedented cash (yes, actual cash) reserves, which is literally harmful to the world economy.
Apple can set standards for other app stores (Score:2)
Tesla? (Score:2)
This law would be fun when applied to Tesla vehicles.
Just imagine, when can we sideload navigation apps, battery control apps, air cond control apps, etc into a Tesla?
Apply just as well to any other brand that comes with a large screen and/or entertainment system.
Re: Tesla? (Score:2)
Will this apply to others with locked down devices (Score:2)
Will this new law target other manufactures of devices that are locked-down or is Apple being singled out here?
If you are going to argue that Apple having control over what you run on your iPhone or iPad is bad, then you can't argue that the same isn't true when Sony controls what you can run on your PlayStation or when Nintendo controls what you can run on your Switch?
Re: (Score:2)
Will this new law target other manufactures of devices that are locked-down or is Apple being singled out here?
Found the guy too lazy to read the summary.
What causes you to imagine willful ignorance is a useful place to post from?
Re: (Score:2)
What causes you to imagine willful ignorance is a useful place to post from?
Probably all the other morons doing it here. Seems too many people have been told they are "special" and "smart" and that actually finding out things before talking about them is optional.
Noooooo!! (Score:3)
iMessage interop, ok.. Yes please
Third party app stores... NOOO!!!
Not unless there is a requirement that all apps published in third party stores MUST also be present in Apple's and therefore pass Apple's requirements.
I refuse to install other app stores. On PC, I trust Microsoft and Steam. Epic should be banned as a virus.
On iPhone, a device that if compromised would allow total identity theft and destruction of my life, I would prefer more app store restrictions, not less. Do you really want a company like Steam or Epic to produce an app with enough system privileges to install apps on the device which acts as you drivers license, bank id, national ID card? Do I want a game company to have access to choose which APIs are accessible to third party apps?
I already don't trust Apple to make those choices. The phone is too dangerous now. I don't want my kids installing app stores like that.
If they allow this, then there must be a requirement that holds shops legally and financially responsible with no limit for illegal activities against the owner of the phone from apps they allowed to be installed. These third party stores should be liable and accountable for poor due diligence.
If my identity were to be stolen today due to a compromised app, I would sue Apple. That's what that 30% is. It's an insurance fee I pay to Apple that specifically makes them accountable for the wares in their store.
All stores should be required by law to meet those standards.
Re:Noooooo!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Or you could just not install the third party app stores...
Consumer choice? WTH? Cannot have that! Consumers must be enslaved and only allowed to do _exactly_ the things the vendor wants!
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really want a company like Steam or Epic to produce an app with enough system privileges to install apps on the device which acts as you drivers license, bank id, national ID card?
Are you really stupid enough to commit all of those vitally important documents to the same device?
Have you never heard of single point of failure? Your phone battery dies, the device gets stolen or run over by a truck and what do you do then? Maybe phone your bank/DVA/Govt department to send out replacement cards? Oh, wait...
And what do you do when this happens when you're on holiday, 8,000 miles from home in a country where nobody speaks your language? I bet you're one of those people who doesn't do backu
Re: (Score:2)
"Not unless there is a requirement that all apps published in third party stores MUST also be present in Apple's and therefore pass Apple's requirements."
Given Apple's highly-anticompetitive "You may not make an app which recreates a function or feature of one of our apps" I say no, fuck off with your requirements bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
"You may not make an app which recreates a function or feature of one of our apps" ...
There is no such rule
Do you have a mental problem?
Re: (Score:2)
If my identity were to be stolen today due to a compromised app, I would sue Apple.
And you would lose. Apple has indemnified themselves and you agreed to their terms. They get the profits without taking any responsibility.
Re: (Score:2)
If my identity were to be stolen today due to a compromised app, I would sue Apple. That's what that 30% is. It's an insurance fee I pay to Apple that specifically makes them accountable for the wares in their store.
Good luck with that. Ha ha ha.
Re: (Score:2)
You disagree with yourself. You are for side-loading of apps which inherently would bypass Apple's requirements but then support an idea that Apple gets to dictate what software you run on your phone.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either support openness or the Apple dictatorship. Time to choose.
Epic should be banned as a virus.
Is Samuel L Jackson holding a gun to your head shouting "Install Epic games store motherfucker"
On iPhone, a device that if compromised would allow total identity theft and destruction of my life
I agree, you should take ownership and responsibility of your security and not hide behind some mamma corp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. As it comes, the Fire is locked to the Amazon app store. But you _can_ install the Google Play Store and just have to agree to some warnings to do it. It is not a single klick but it is not difficult either and Amazon does not fight this. And that is the legal way to do a walled garden: Allow people out after having made it clear to them they are going out. The EU is merely stopping the illegal crap Apple is doing.
I have a cheap used Kindle Fire to use for some Android apps I do not want on my phone
Re: (Score:2)
Third party app stores... NOOO!!!
Not unless there is a requirement that all apps published in third party stores MUST also be present in Apple's and therefore pass Apple's requirements.
That's the current situation. There are lots of "app stores" but they are just search engines. When you click install they take you to the Apple App Store app.
Side loading, ok. (been there since the start anyway)
Only on Android. You can't side-load on iOS, at least without jailbreaking first.
Android seems to cope just fine with other app stores, notably F-Droid and Amazon. Google's Play Services still scans apps from other sources for malware.
Hack all the things! (Score:2)
Let's start with Jobs' baby.
Seriously, I like the closed ecosystem (Score:5, Insightful)
I like that iphones are trustable. I want something that just works.
Don't get me wrong, I run Linux on my desktops because I want to install experimental software or compile code without all the lockdowns. But my iphone is just another tool, it's an appliance. Appliances should be sealed up and just do their job with maximal reliability.
Android is there if you don't like that. But don't make apple users conform to your idea of what an apple phone should be. I like how it is.
Agreed. Closed systems should be allowed (Score:3)
And that's exactly what we have with the Apple vs Android smartphone market.
These EU rules are misguided, made by those who don't understand the dangers and / or difficulty of use of uncontrolled complexity in a tech ecosystem.
I happen to tend toward the android side of this equation, but for at least some safety/worry-free-ness, generall
Re: (Score:2)
If you want a device that can babysit you, then that's your prerogative and there should be no issue with the market offering that as a solution.
The issue is where they force you to that option and lock you in with no choice. There should at least be the option to fully unlock a device you OWN, even if you have to jump through a few hoops to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you aren't experiencing a problem, does not mean the problem doesn't exist. The world doesn't gravitate around you, or any other singular person including me.
Re:Seriously, I like the closed ecosystem (Score:4, Insightful)
I like that iphones are trustable. I want something that just works.
The "trustable" part is the app store, so just install apps from that and nothing changes. Nobody is forcing you to use other app stores or payment methods, you just might pay more to use Apple's services simply because they charge more.
Re:Seriously, I like the closed ecosystem (Score:5, Insightful)
I like that iphones are trustable. I want something that just works.
The "trustable" part is the app store, so just install apps from that and nothing changes. Nobody is forcing you to use other app stores or payment methods, you just might pay more to use Apple's services simply because they charge more.
FALSE. As soon as sideloading is allowed, some major app vendors (looking at you, EPIC) will try their utmost to strongarm users into downloading apps outside the Appstore. Sure, nobody is holding a gun to my head forcing me to download a specific app, but that snideness is not helpful either.
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as sideloading is allowed, some major app vendors (looking at you, EPIC) will try their utmost to strongarm users into downloading apps outside the Appstore.
Why though? They can still offer it on the Apple app store and also offer it on alternative app stores and reduce the prices on other app stores to account for the payment processing fee Apple charges. Currently Epic simply don't offer Fortnite on iOS at all.
Sure, nobody is holding a gun to my head forcing me to download a specific app, but that snideness is not helpful either.
If the Apple app store provides significant value to both customers and vendors then they will use it. Part of the value proposition for iOS is that it has apps so free apps don't even pay anything to Apple for app store use, the only time you pay is if
Re: (Score:2)
Why though? They can still offer it on the Apple app store and also offer it on alternative app stores and reduce the prices on other app stores to account for the payment processing fee Apple charges. Currently Epic simply don't offer Fortnite on iOS at all.
Why? Because Apple may refuse to carry the respective app, or impose some unacceptable terms. Some developers may "force" their users to use alternate stores simply because they are forces out of the Apple store.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not forced to use an iPhone. I choose to. I don't want my phone turned into a PC. I like knowing it just works (mostly). I do not want epic or anyone else trying to force me onto a third party App Store to install an otherwise interesting app and having that squidgy "do I really want to click on this?" feeling.
On App Store I know there's a third party who has incentive to kick off shifty devs. Who has that incentive when the App Store is owned by the devs? How would I even know if they're shifty?
Re: (Score:2)
It's no different than how it works today - if an app developer is requiring something that is over the line for you, then you don't use their fucking app. It's no different than it requesting location permission all the time, when you are unwilling to give that app location permission all the time.
Bonus points for telling them why they didn't get another user, or another sale. And if they get enough concurrent feedback, maybe they change their shitty ask to be less shitty.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I want a popular app that dev has made side load only then I am forced to.
I don't care -at all- what cut Apple takes.
If side loading from unknown places was important to me I'd use an android.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody is forcing you to use other app stores or payment methods, you just might pay more to use Apple's services simply because they charge more.
FALSE. As soon as sideloading is allowed, some major app vendors (looking at you, EPIC) will try their utmost to strongarm users into downloading apps outside the Appstore. Sure, nobody is holding a gun to my head forcing me to download a specific app, but that snideness is not helpful either.
That argument is complete chickenshit. It's not horseshit because it's also cowardly. Right now you are being strongarmed into only getting apps through the app store. Your argument is just don't buy an iPhone if you don't want to be forced to do that, but why can't you apply that same logic to just not using an app store if you don't want to? You say yourself that nobody is holding a gun to your head, but then you FUD about how EPIC is going to "try" to "strongarm" you into bypassing the app store. You hav
Re: (Score:2)
Apple did not strong arm me into anything.
I -chose- iPhone knowing it's a controlled walled garden.
Not everyone wants their phone to be the Wild West.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple did not strong arm me into anything.
No, they fooled you.
Re: (Score:2)
will try their utmost to strongarm users into downloading apps outside the Appstore
That's called part of the value proposition. Do you want to play the game produced by company X? Do you still want to play the game if you have company X's app store?
It's their product, their service. You're a user. No one is forcing you to do anything. But above all, you do not have some inalienable right to pick and choose how company X offers you their product and service. It's a service that is presented to you entirely at the discretion of the provider.
And Apple shouldn't have that power either.
Re: (Score:2)
So because you predict that certain app vendors may possibly withdraw from Apple's App Store, nobody else should have the freedom to install software from the source of their choosing.
Re: (Score:2)
So don't do that? And for bonus points: express your displeasure to any vendor that tries it. If they get enough feedback and see their number of users drop, they'll get the hint.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, the exception is for buying physical goods. If buying digital goods as an in-app purchase, Apple gets their taste or you fuck off. Amazon still makes you have to fuck around with a browser if you want to buy an e-book and read it in your Kindle app, because Apple wants 30% for literally nothing. Amazon is more than competent enough to use their own store API to handle payments.
Same with Spotify and audio books. They already have a payment and subscription backend that they could easily lever
Re: (Score:2)
You can still have that. It's not like the EU wants to force you to sideload software that wasn't blessed by the Apple high priests.
Re: (Score:2)
I like that iphones are trustable.
Apple is a publicly held corporation. Trusting them is for rubes.
I want something that just works.
GLWT. I was an Apple user for a lot of years, and Apple is only interested in selling that perception, not the reality.
Apple has delivered malware from their precious store before, and they will do it again.
my iphone is just another tool, it's an appliance.
How can you know so much and yet so little? Your iPhone is a general purpose computer which you are pretending is a corkscrew. It has never been that simple.
Appliances should be sealed up and just do their job with maximal reliability.
What does that have to do with iPhones, which are designed with inadequate battery
Re: (Score:2)
Why does having the option of being able to use a non-Apple provided solution mean you cannot still use the Apple solution? There's no end of Android devices that never side-load anything on them, because the owners of those devices find what they need through the provided app store, exactly the same as iPhone users do. But, if they don't, or if Google gets into a piss-fight with someone and kicks them off the Play Store, we still have the option to load what the fuck we want on the phone we bought.
Nobody
Re: (Score:2)
>I like that iphones are trustable. I want something that just works.
And if you want to, you can keep your closed ecosystem. No one is going to force you to sideload apps.
And what about iMessage interoperability? That has nothing to do with trustability, just working, and everything to do with the suckiness of a closed ecosystem.
Re:Seriously, I like the closed ecosystem (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting that people are supposedly getting so butt hurt by this when it won't impact them at all. (I say supposedly, because I wonder what % of the complainers are paid shills.) All of this gives you the option of using alternate app stores and interoperability with other messaging platforms. Namely iMessage will have to play nice with the new texting standard instead of converting to a very annoying (intentionally so) SMS message. None of this forces anyone to USE any of it! If you like your little walled garden with your Apple overloads, you can sit in it with your back happily turned to the gate that was installed to allow others to work with you in your little garden.
Apple has not drug their feet on implementing this interoperability not because it causes problems with their Eco-system or because it poses a threat to their users. No, they haven't done so because it wasn't in their business interest to do so. So, this is simply forcing them to do what they should have done anyway, but didn't because it benefits their competitors, not them!
Re: (Score:2)
As a user of the F-Droid alternative app store, I have to say that its existence is very valuable to me. There are lots of apps on there that are no available on Play, or the Play versions are gimped somehow to comply with Google's rules.
F-Droid also has a better UI than Play, and gives you relevant information like apps containing things you might not like.
Re: (Score:2)
Except: there is no new texting standard.
And whence there will be one: Apple will most likely be one of the first to support it, as always.
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly is your problem? Did I miss something reading that paper, was there some provision where the EU requires you to load some kind of software on your phone that didn't come out of the Apple store?
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that just because you have the ability to sideload apps, doesn't mean you must sideload apps. The app store will still be there for people that want it.
I don't know why you think that this regulation would change how things work today, other than making anti-competitive horseshit illegal in the EU. And I sure don't know why you think that would be a bad thing, since users always benefit from increased competition for the user's purchase.
Re: (Score:2)
Or an Apple cultist, pissed at the EU for doubting the wisdom of that all-hallowed Steve.
They're hard to distinguish these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you think the US will react if Apple tells the EU to fuck off? If they get away with that, do you think they might want to pull the same stunt the next time the US passes a law they don't like?
Don't piss off large countries. They don't like that one bit. And they don't even like it if you do it to other big countries because they know they could be next.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They've just confirmed they are moving iPhone to USB-C because the EU mandated it; ironically in that case the EU took so long to mandate it that it's probably going to cause more waste than it saves now.
It's not going to cause any waste because Apple was going to do it in a generation or two anyway, because Lightning can't deliver enough current to charge a modern flagship phone in a reasonable time period. They certainly have cried a lot about being forced to slightly alter their schedule, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple and Google should tell the EU to fuck off and threaten to pull out of the EU entirely. What will the EU do, say goodbye? Yeah, good luck with that.
Sure, Apple is just going to kiss $50B/yr goodbye. Are you new?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple and Google should tell the EU to fuck off and threaten to pull out of the EU entirely. What will the EU do, say goodbye? Yeah, good luck with that.
Sure, Apple is just going to kiss $50B/yr goodbye. Are you new?
Probably just a moron "MAGA!"-screamer. Responding to obviously sorely needed anti-trust action in this way is not the sign of somebody that understands anything.
Re: (Score:2)
I recommend you look up "anti-trust" and why it is critical for keeping capitalism going. Then you will maybe stop with the abysmally stupid comparisons. Or did you buy that restaurant? No? Then that nice little story does have no relation to the situation at hand.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd think someone would open another restaurant, maybe a McDonald's, an Applebys.or maybe a PF Chang's. Yes I know economy of scale
yadda yadda yadda. The problem is Apple is about 25% of the market with the rest going going to Android with a negligible percentage to other. It's pretty clear that the people who want an Android like experience can have an android like experience.
Another way to look at it is, if you buy a ROKU TV, you really don't expect to be able to use it as a computer. Ma
Re: (Score:2)
Another way to look at it is, if you buy a ROKU TV, you really don't expect to be able to use it as a computer.
Yes, I totally do [makeuseof.com]. Nice try, but you're going to have to try again.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair if you base your analysis on how the system works in America then it does seem like it pretty much all comes down to who is offering politicians the biggest wad of cash, so it would be easy to assume the same is true everywhere else.
This mindset that companies shouldn't be made to do anything on principle always seems pretty odd to me. We require the